Master Index of Archived Threads


The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Frayed Knot May 31 2012 07:06 AM

Perhaps a more scientific analysis will prove this to be less the case than I'm imagining, but these late-inning pen meltdowns--the ones that not only turn leads or ties into deficits but often small deficits into LARGE ones--have got to be the biggest factor in the RS/RA gap that our W/L record has, from very early in the season to the present, so far managed to overcome*. There have been a (relative) ton of these this year and I'm hard pressed to think of any that have gone the other way. It's like the pen has adopted the George Costanza method, the one where he doesn't merely want to get fired, he wants to go in such a way where years after he's gone people will remember the blaze of glory that he went out to as they say; "Now THAT guy got fired!" Our pen, they don't just let small leads slip away via walks and singles that result in one-run losses. When they blow leads, they BLOW leads and make sure that no comeback is even contemplated! * Their record currently sits at five games better than the Pythagorean projection as the NYM staff sports a 5.80 9th inning ERA and a 6.00 in extras - and even those numbers were looking better recently seeing as how, prior to last night, they were coming off a Johan CG shutout and three straight Frank-Frank outings where he gave up a total of one hit.

Ceetar May 31 2012 07:24 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

It's the bullpens fault. Mostly Manny Acosta but other guys are certainly contributing. I've run the numbers and even wrote it up a bit but never edited it and the numbers always change, via a game being played, before I do. It's certainly been very flukey though. I mean, the Mets won pretty succinctly against the Padres. and one game undoes all the good work they did in terms of run differential.

Nymr83 May 31 2012 07:26 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Fuck this Python guy, we're winning! The bullpen does seem to get lit on fire a lot though. And the offense has a tendency to take a lead but then not really expand on it.

Benjamin Grimm May 31 2012 07:39 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Through 51 games, the Mets, when they win, win by an average margin of 2.785714 runs. And when they lose, they lose by an average of 4.434783 runs.

Ceetar May 31 2012 08:13 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

via @tpgmets (good follow btw) Their 41 shutdowns are t-5th best in the NL & t-9th best in MLB. Unfortunately, their 30 meltdowns are 2nd worst in the NL & MLB. So they've really been more high variance than outright bad (although they have not been a net asset).

Edgy MD May 31 2012 08:16 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Even when they're winning by 2.785714 runs, we really shouldn't feel good about it until they tack on 1.649069 more,

batmagadanleadoff May 31 2012 10:21 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

In a warped sort of way, I kinda like that the fringe end of the Mets pen could be so toxic so as to frequently fire-start a close game into oblivion. Because it shows Collins, and any other stupid manager that's hung up on this 9th inning closer guy bullshit that every inning counts. And a run scored in the 7th counts just as much as a run scored in the 9th.

Vic Sage May 31 2012 10:31 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

yes, cuz Collins seems to be the kind of manager likely to embrace a radical reimagining of bullpen usage.

Benjamin Grimm May 31 2012 10:32 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Yeah, but I just don't see that it's likely that the conventional wisdom will be overturned any time soon.

batmagadanleadoff May 31 2012 10:36 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Well if Collins doesn't get it, then he deserves the Mets woeful run differential. And if that run differential is not flukish, then the Mets will eventually drop from this pennant race like a sinking stone.

Vic Sage May 31 2012 10:38 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Well if Collins doesn't get it, then he deserves the Mets woeful run differential. And if that run differential is not flukish, then the Mets will eventually drop from this pennant race like a sinking stone. this is my thesis, in a nutshell.

Edgy MD May 31 2012 10:45 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Well, it's not like LaRussa didn't win three championships, and Whitey Herzog perhaps should have. There are other virtue to a manager. This one just seems like a brass ring for any manager to grasp.

Ceetar May 31 2012 11:32 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

The data doesn't suggest this is a worse method of pitcher use either. Whether or not it's fluky, it's not relevant to the differential going forward or predictive of any falloff in record, especially since the Mets won't be able to repeat the #1 cause of the blowouts: pitching Manny Acosta.

The Second Spitter May 31 2012 05:57 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Pythagorean Exceptation is not normally distributed (not for wins-loss anyway). There's some evidence suggesting that large differentials early in the season to pervade the course of the season. Iirc the 86 Mets are an example of this.

Elster88 Jun 01 2012 09:01 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

+8 today.

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 11:09 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

A little post-blowout update. Date June 1 Runs For 228 Runs Against 244 Pyth. W % .466 Winning % .558 Difference -.092

Edgy MD Jun 13 2012 11:22 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Always good to deceptively check back after a blowout. Date June 13 Runs For 273 Runs Against 283 Pyth. Win. % .482 Act. Win. % .532 Difference -.050

Ceetar Jun 13 2012 11:33 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

I wrote about this some yesterday. [url]http://www.ceetar.com/optimisticmetsfan/2012/06/12/run-differential-and-the-mets/ The Mets are now +10 swapping Acosta for a 2011 version of Acosta. 53:39 over the last 11 games has them at what should be a .637 winning percentage, or 7-4 when they're actually 5-6. swapping out Acosta (which I do to make the point that Acosta will not continue giving up runs at the rate that he did by virtue of either improving or not being here) gives the Mets a Pythagorean record of 32-30 which is actually only one game worse than the 33-29 they're at.

Vic Sage Jun 13 2012 01:11 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

I wrote about this some yesterday. [url]http://www.ceetar.com/optimisticmetsfan/2012/06/12/run-differential-and-the-mets/ The Mets are now +10 swapping Acosta for a 2011 version of Acosta. 53:39 over the last 11 games has them at what should be a .637 winning percentage, or 7-4 when they're actually 5-6. swapping out Acosta (which I do to make the point that Acosta will not continue giving up runs at the rate that he did by virtue of either improving or not being here) gives the Mets a Pythagorean record of 32-30 which is actually only one game worse than the 33-29 they're at. but you don't get to swap him out for a mythical Acosta from the past; you get to swap him out for the Schwinden (12.86 era) and Elvin Ramirez (10.80 era) that replaced him. There's always a guy at the back of the pen who sucks, on every team with a negative run differential. that doesn't mean much to me.

Ceetar Jun 13 2012 01:16 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Vic Sage wrote: but you don't get to swap him out for a mythical Acosta from the past; you get to swap him out for the Schwinden (12.86 era) and Elvin Ramirez (10.80 era) that replaced him. There's always a guy at the back of the pen who sucks, on every team with a negative run differential. that doesn't mean much to me. Elvin Ramirez is better than that and Schwinden threw...what, 1 inning? (And they're still better. That's how bad Manny was) but that's not the point. The data was created with Manny Acosta as an input. He's no longer 'putting. Therefore it's hard to say the Mets will suck because run differential says so, when a big reason for that is gone. If you want to tell me the guy that gets Acosta's innings will suck, well sure, that's a possibility. I disagree though, I think Ramirez is good, I think Mejia and Beato are pretty good as well. Acosta was on pace to give up like 60 more runs. That's a lot.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 13 2012 01:24 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Swapping Acosta for MikePiazza2000 would also improve the run differential.

Edgy MD Jun 13 2012 07:57 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Here's a thought: Let's swap Acosta for R.A. Dickey Date June 13 PM Runs For 282 Runs Against 284 Pyth. Win. % .496 Act. Win. % .540 Difference -.044

Ceetar Jun 13 2012 08:11 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

gimme a 3 run win tomorrow!

Swan Swan H Jun 14 2012 12:54 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

...is, as of this moment, a surplus.

Edgy MD Jun 14 2012 01:53 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Well, not really. While we have more runs gained than yielded, a Pythag. surplus will come when our Pythagorean winning percentage exceeds our actual winning percentage.

Edgy MD Jun 14 2012 02:50 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

In the black, gents. Date June 14 Runs For 291 Runs Against 290 Pyth. Win. % .502 Act. Win. % .547 Difference -.045 The difference falls in the other direction, though. Big whoop.

Edgy MD Jun 18 2012 08:47 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Date June 18 Runs For 301 Runs Against 304 Pyth. Win. % .495 Act. Win. % .529 Difference -.034 Pyth. Rec. 34-34 Act. Rec. 36-32 Difference 2 games

Edgy MD Jun 19 2012 07:48 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Definitely living within the margin of error. Date June 19 Runs For 306 Runs Against 304 Pyth. Win. % .503 Act. Win. % .536 Difference -.033 Pyth. Rec. 35-34 Act. Rec. 37-32 Difference 2 games

duan Jun 20 2012 08:42 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Edgy DC wrote: Definitely living within the margin of error. Date June 19 Runs For 306 Runs Against 304 Pyth. Win. % .503 Act. Win. % .536 Difference -.033 Pyth. Rec. 35-34 Act. Rec. 37-32 Difference 2 games that's called the Manny Acosta deficit

Edgy MD Jun 20 2012 09:06 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

Acosta's gone, but his spirit haunts the pen. Date June 20 Runs For 310 Runs Against 307 Pyth. Win. % .505 Act. Win. % .543 Difference -.038 Pyth. Rec. 35-35 Act. Rec. 38-32 Difference =#FF0000]3 games

Edgy MD Jun 27 2012 07:16 PM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

A few close losses, one big win, and this thing is pretty normalized. Date June 27 Runs For 344 Runs Against 333 Pyth. Win. % .518 Act. Win. % .526 Difference -.008 Pyth. Rec. 39-37 Act. Rec. 40-36 Difference =#FF0000]1 game

Edgy MD Jun 30 2012 06:31 AM Re: The ongoing Pythagorean deficit

At this point close losses have been as important as blowout wins in reconciling our team with Pythagorean Win Theory. And after a few of both, we're pretty much at scratch. Date June 30 Runs For 357 Runs Against 335 Pyth. Win. % .531760 Act. Win. % .538462 Difference -.006702 Pyth. Rec. 41.48-36.52 Act. Rec. 42-36 Difference =#FF0000]0.52 games So yay! According to PWT (at least when using the exponent of two), our team is pretty much exactly what their record says they are --- or more accurately, they pretty much have been what their record says they've been.